For Palestinians, Terrorism, Not Competence, Is the Path to Political Popularity

Salam Fayyad, the former prime minister of the Palestinian Authority, has recently been subjected to legal bullying by Mahmoud Abbas, who sees him as a potential rival. Khaled Abu Toameh explains why Fayyad is, and is not, a real threat:

Following his resignation as prime minister, the U.S.-educated Fayyad established a Ramallah-based group called Future for Palestine. According to Fayyad, the group’s mission is to “enhance the resilience of Palestinian citizens in their homeland, especially in marginalized and severely impacted areas, by providing the basic development requirements.”

Abbas and the Palestinian Authority leadership did not like the idea from the beginning. Ever since Future for Palestine was established in August 2013, they have been working toward undermining the group and its founder. . . .

[But] Fayyad’s chances of succeeding Abbas are [anyway] very slim, if not non-existent. Fayyad is an independent figure who does not belong to Fatah, Hamas, or any other political group. When he ran in the January 2006 parliamentary election at the head of the Third Way list, his group received two seats out of 132.

The reason most Palestinians did not vote for Fayyad is because he . . . did not participate in any armed attack on Jews, and never supported the armed struggle against Israel. . . . It took Salam Fayyad too long to realize that no matter how many good things he does for his people, in the end he will be judged on the basis of his contribution to the fight against Israel.

Read more at Gatestone

More about: Mahmoud Abbas, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian economy, Politics & Current Affairs, Salam Fayyad

Expand Gaza into Sinai

Feb. 11 2025

Calling the proposal to depopulate Gaza completely (if temporarily) “unworkable,” Peter Berkowitz makes the case for a similar, but more feasible, plan:

The United States along with Saudi Arabia and the UAE should persuade Egypt by means of generous financial inducements to open the sparsely populated ten-to-fifteen miles of Sinai adjacent to Gaza to Palestinians seeking a fresh start and better life. Egypt would not absorb Gazans and make them citizens but rather move Gaza’s border . . . westward into Sinai. Fences would be erected along the new border. The Israel Defense Force would maintain border security on the Gaza-extension side, Egyptian forces on the other. Egypt might lease the land to the Palestinians for 75 years.

The Sinai option does not involve forced transfer of civilian populations, which the international laws of war bar. As the United States, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and other partners build temporary dwellings and then apartment buildings and towns, they would provide bus service to the Gaza-extension. Palestinian families that choose to make the short trip would receive a key to a new residence and, say, $10,000.

The Sinai option is flawed. . . . Then again, all conventional options for rehabilitating and governing Gaza are terrible.

Read more at RealClear Politics

More about: Donald Trump, Egypt, Gaza Strip, Sinai Peninsula